Re: Ravenscar-compliant bounded buffer

["Steve" <nospam_steved94@comcast.net>]

"Robert A Duff" <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in message 
news:wccps0vkhvo.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com...
> "Steve" <nospam_steved94@comcast.net> writes:
>
>> Given the restriction, I found your example easy to follow.  I don't know
>> where to find the Ravenscar document for comparison.
>
> The Ravenscar profile is documented in section D.13.1 of the latest Ada
> Reference Manual.
>

Unless I'm looking the wrong place, section D.13.1 of the ARM (on AdaIC) 
just lists the restrictions.  The original post was asking about the clarity 
of an example in a specific document.

>> Ada 83 was restrictive in ways that were found to be overly restrictive 
>> for
>> practical application.  Some of these retrictions were relaxed with Ada 
>> 95.
>> Perhaps the next round of Ravenscar will do the same.
>
> I don't see any need to relax Ravenscar, because if you want to use
> features not allowed by Ravenscar, you don't have to restrict yourself
> to Ravenscar.  It's a free choice.  I suppose we could argue about
> whether the exact set of restrictions is appropriate, but the whole
> point is to be restrictive, so the run-time system can be simplified (as
> compared to a run-time system that supports full Ada).

The choice of the exact set of restrictions that are appropriate is what may 
in practice make sense to change.  After some experience with the 
restrictions it may be found that a minor modification to one of the 
restrictions may reduce complexity of implementations.

Regards,
Steve

>
> - Bob